DETAILED ACTION
AIA
STATUS OF CLAIMS
Canceled 14 15 21-33
Amended 1 2 6-11 13 17-19
Claims 1-13, 16-19 from the application US Ser 18075533 filed 6 December 2022 are examined.
18556605 filed 10/20/2023 is National Stage entry of PCT/CA2022/050482 Intl Filing 03/30/2022
PCT/CA2022/050482 Claims Priority from Provisional Application 63177659 , filed 04/21/2021
PCT/CA2022/050482 Claims Priority from Provisional Application 63209768 , filed 06/11/2021
Response to Remarks
Applicant amendment remarks fully considered but unfortunately not fully persuasive.
Examiner thanks Attorney for the amendment to advance prosecution.
Collect information, analyze it, display certain results (Electric Power Group CAFC 2016) is on point regardless of slight discrepancies in the facts.
Applicant is automating certain method of human behavior, with generic additional elements generally applied.
Independent Claims -- similar one to another.
CERTAIN METHODS OF ORGANIZING HUMAN ACTIVITY
Alice clearinghouse via computer
Bilski hedge via computer
Here targeted marketing via computer
The Claims: rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as directed to an abstract idea (Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity) without significantly more.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title
The claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. The claim(s) is/are directed to one or more abstract idea(s). The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea(s).
Step 1: (MPEP 2106.03)
The claims and dependents are directed to statutory classes (1 process, 10 process, 20 process). The claims herein are directed to subject matter which would be classified under one of the listed statutory classifications (i.e., 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (hereinafter “PEG”) “PEG” Step 1=Yes).
Step 2A, Prong One: Evaluating whether the claim(s) recite(s) a judicial exception -- law of nature, natural phenomenon, abstract idea. (MPEP 2106.04).
US Serial No. 18556605
18556605
EPG
1. A method for validating physical items displayed on a tangible fixture, the method comprising:
a) receiving identification data that identifies a specific tangible fixture in an physical retail establishment
b) retrieving a listing of physical items expected to be displayed on said specific tangible fixture
c) retrieving stored images of physical items that are listed in said listing of physical items retrieved in step (b)
d) displaying a stored image of a specific physical item to a user, said specific physical items being in said listing retrieved in step (b)
e) instructing said user to capture an image using a camera, said image being an image of said specific tangible fixture and said image showing at least one physical item that is displayed on said specific tangible fixture
f) receiving image of said specific tangible fixture at a server
g) at said server, automatically applying a virtual grid overlay to said image to thereby divide said image into portions, wherein each of said portions corresponds to a storage location for a physical item;
h) at said server, comparing one of said portions to said stored image of said specific physical item, wherein said comparing comprises applying at least one digital image comparison technique;
i) at said server, producing comparison results based on the results of step h), said comparison results indicating whether said stored image of said specific physical item matches said one of said portions of said image;
j) repeating steps h) and i) such that each of said portions of said image is compared with said stored image of said specific physical item, until a condition is determined to be true, said condition being one of: i.1) said comparison results indicate that said stored image of said specific physical item substantially matches said one of said portions of said image; or j.2) all of said portions of said image have been compared to said stored image of said physical item;
k) when said stored image of said specific physical item substantially matches said one of said portions of said image
l) repeating steps d)-k) for each physical item in said listing.
PNG
media_image1.png
528
644
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Collecting info,
analyzing it,
displaying certain results.
bold = judicial exception apply it
The [ additional elements ] e.g. server, camera, virtual grid overlay and elements related thereto are just automation of an abstract idea.
Collecting info, analyzing it, displaying certain results. Elec. Power Group (CAFC 2016)
Independent Claims -- similar one to another.
CERTAIN METHODS OF ORGANIZING HUMAN ACTIVITY
Alice clearinghouse via computer
Bilski hedge via computer
Here targeted marketing via computer
The Claims: rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as directed to an abstract idea (Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity) without significantly more.
Step 2A, Prong Two: Identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception(s); and then evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether they integrate the exception into a practical application. Prong Two distinguishes claims that are "directed to" the recited judicial exception from claims that are not "directed to" the recited judicial exception. (MPEP 2106.04).
The claim says take the idea and “apply it” with generic elements generally applied.
The additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The additional elements add MPEP 2106.05 is “iii. Mere automation of manual processes”. See (MPEP 21056.05 “vi. Instructions to display two sets of information on a computer display in a non-interfering manner”).
Dependent claims 2-13, 16-19 are the idea plus Collecting info, analyzing it, displaying certain results to automate an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Identifying whether there are any additional elements (features/limitations/steps) recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception(s), and then evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether they contribute an inventive concept (i.e., amount to significantly more than the judicial exception(s)). (MPEP 2106.05)
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. See (MPEP 21056.05 “vi. Instructions to display two sets of information on a computer display in a non-interfering manner”). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
During prosecution, applicant has an opportunity and a duty to amend ambiguous claims to clearly and precisely define the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. The claim places the public on notice of the scope of the patentee’s right to exclude. See, e.g., Johnson & Johnston Assoc. Inc. v. R.E. Serv. Co., 285 F.3d 1046, 1052, 62 USPQ2d 1225, 1228 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (en banc). As stated in Halliburton Energy Servs., Inc. v. M-I LLC, 514 F.3d 1244, 1255, 85 USPQ2d 1654, 1663 (CAFC 2008):
“We note that the patent drafter is in the best position to resolve the ambiguity in the patent claims, and it is highly desirable that patent examiners demand that applicants do so in appropriate circumstances so that the patent can be amended during prosecution rather than attempting to resolve the ambiguity in litigation”
Conclusion
Pertinent prior art cited but not relied upon
US 20080306787
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BREFFNI X BAGGOT whose telephone number is (571)272-7154. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-10a, 12p-6p.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Waseem Ashraf can be reached at 571-270-3948. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
BREFFNI BAGGOT
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3621
/BREFFNI BAGGOT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3621